The HuntingPA.com Outdoor Community banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,072 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I got a pile of these to try out. They are a bugger to get used to tying because they want to spin, or not seat well on the hook. I found that using some thicker diameter wire and cramming it against the head works pretty well. I am a big fan of Lively Legz as well. I combined the two and think these flies turned out great. I am still working out the kinks with tying them but they slammed trout this morning.















They are tungsten as well so they get down. Not sure if they will be more effective than regular tung beads, but I hope these will work when the water levels are a bit lower since they aren't as flashy.

Thanks for the look.

Product testing went well as well. Caught around 10 this morning on them.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,072 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I have tried that and wasn't working as good, even put head cement down after the thread dam.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,804 Posts
Don't real nymphs have 6 legs???


Betcha your catch rate would go up a ton!!






Really...ive been out of the fly fishing world for a while now..well...dabbled in Michigan..but 2009 was the last spring fly fished...

Crazy how realistic they look...


No 1000% accurate way to see if they make a lick of difference...but the head and legs are awesome realistic!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,472 Posts
Don't real nymphs have 6 legs???


Betcha your catch rate would go up a ton!!
Why am I picturing a 16" Brown, wavering in a pool, looking up and counting, "1, 2, 3, 4..... nope, gonna pass."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,072 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
They do but on the smaller flies your proportions get out of wack if you use all 6. I tie some stone flies in the 6 leg variety but on may fly nymph representations I focus on the proportions of the body.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,246 Posts
Not that my opinion matters and I realize you likely weren't fishing in a FFO area anyway, but I don't think flies made with Lively Legz should be allowed in FFO areas. Why not just tie a rubber worm onto a hook behind a hackle? Would that be fly fishing?

At what point is a "fly" no longer a "fly"?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
260 Posts
FrankTroutAngler said:
Not that my opinion matters and I realize you likely weren't fishing in a FFO area anyway, but I don't think flies made with Lively Legz should be allowed in FFO areas. Why not just tie a rubber worm onto a hook behind a hackle? Would that be fly fishing?

At what point is a "fly" no longer a "fly"?
If you think that of those lively legs, I'd hate to see what you'd think of a Vlad Worm
.

I think the fish commission is pretty clear on their definition of what qualifies as legal for a flyfishing only area. By that definition, the above pictured flies are perfectly okay.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,583 Posts
Chad1 said:
FrankTroutAngler said:
Not that my opinion matters and I realize you likely weren't fishing in a FFO area anyway, but I don't think flies made with Lively Legz should be allowed in FFO areas. Why not just tie a rubber worm onto a hook behind a hackle? Would that be fly fishing?

At what point is a "fly" no longer a "fly"?
If you think that of those lively legs, I'd hate to see what you'd think of a Vlad Worm
.

I think the fish commission is pretty clear on their definition of what qualifies as legal for a flyfishing only area. By that definition, the above pictured flies are perfectly okay.
Hey now, go easy on the vladi worm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
260 Posts
attackone said:
Hey now, go easy on the vladi worm
My biggest gripe about the vladi worm is trying to explain why I have the main component for it in my fly tying bag. I get a lot of weird stares from non flyfishermen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,246 Posts
treetipper said:
One would expect that from you...
I've gotten similar responses from ego-bruised fly fishermen before, so another one from you doesn't surprise me considering your history of negative comments directed at me.

I did a little research on the PFBC's website about what constitutes a legal fly in a FFO area.

Per the PFBC's regulations for FFO areas: "Fishing may be done with artificial flies and streamers constructed of natural or synthetic materials, so long as all flies are constructed in a normal fashion with components wound on or about the hook."

I guess "natural or synthetic materials" covers just about every material, so putting rubber legs on a fly would be legal, as I thought it would be. To me though it just makes fly fishing even more like bait fishing since some bait anglers use rubber baits. I'm surprised fly fishermen would want to be more like bait fishermen, especially considering the negative view many fly fishermen have toward bait fishermen. I guess you have to go with what works though.

So I guess putting a rubber tail, body and head would be legal too, as long as it is "constructed in a normal fashion with components wound on or about the hook."

What I'd like to know though is how a beadhead fly is legal based on the PFBC's definition? The bead is certainly not "constructed in a normal fashion with components wound on or about the hook." Why not just make a "fly" with four or five beads? Then make it even better by adding a blade and a clevis.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,827 Posts
FTA, IMO you are the one with the ego. In your mind spin fishing is superior to all others. So you catch this many trout in this many hours. So what. You use the same spinner ALL the time and fish the same method ALL the time. I am sure you are good at it as you should be since that's the only way you fish. One word comes to mind to me, BORING!! I enjoy matching hatches, tying flies, practicing casting, tying my own leaders, fishing with a number of different flies including drys, streamers, wets and nymphs. I enjoy the variety and the challenge. You don't like fly fisherman for one reason or another. I really could care less. I do know that I can fish the same streams over and over in a short period of time and the trout will still take my flies. You can't say the same for spinners. They get shy of those things in a hurry. Oh yea and since we are throwing opinions around I think treble hooks should be illegal. I can also assure it took me a lot longer to learn flyfishing( because their is alot more to know) than it ever did to cast and fish a spinner. Everybody has their favorite way to fish and just because you don't fish that way does not make it wrong. It is just different. As for me I will stick with flyfishing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,246 Posts
WildTigerTrout said:
FTA, IMO you are the one with the ego. In your mind spin fishing is superior to all others. So you catch this many trout in this many hours. So what. You use the same spinner ALL the time and fish the same method ALL the time. I am sure you are good at it as you should be since that's the only way you fish. One word comes to mind to me, BORING!! I enjoy matching hatches, tying flies, practicing casting, tying my own leaders, fishing with a number of different flies including drys, streamers, wets and nymphs. I enjoy the variety and the challenge. You don't like fly fisherman for one reason or another. I really could care less. I do know that I can fish the same streams over and over in a short period of time and the trout will still take my flies. You can't say the same for spinners. They get shy of those things in a hurry. Oh yea and since we are throwing opinions around I think treble hooks should be illegal. I can also assure it took me a lot longer to learn flyfishing( because their is alot more to know) than it ever did to cast and fish a spinner. Everybody has their favorite way to fish and just because you don't fish that way does not make it wrong. It is just different. As for me I will stick with flyfishing.
Wow. It sounds like you have a lot of pent-up frustration. I'm glad you got that off of your chest. I hope you feel better now.

...a lot of Strawman's in that rant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,870 Posts
Beadhead flies and man-made synthetic tying materials have been around since long before any of us were born. The materials may have evolved over the years, but the concepts are certainly not new.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,246 Posts
Esox_Hunter said:
Beadhead flies and man-made synthetic tying materials have been around since long before any of us were born. The materials may have evolved over the years, but the concepts are certainly not new.
I never argued that they weren't.

My argument is that the bead used on a beadhead fly is not a component that is wound on or about the hook. Therefore, a beadhead "fly" is really not a fly, at least according to the PFBC's definition of a fly that is legal in a FFO area.

To me once a beadhead is put on a "fly" the "fly" is no longer a fly but is a lure. Would fly fishermen still consider it a fly if five beads were put on a hook and nothing else? (My guess is "yes".)

By the way, I have no doubt that the PFBC considers beadhead "flies" to be legal in FFO areas. I just think that this is a stretch considering their definition.

Tell me, how is a bead a component that is wound on or about the hook?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
993 Posts
FrankTroutAngler said:
treetipper said:
One would expect that from you...
I've gotten similar responses from ego-bruised fly fishermen before, so another one from you doesn't surprise me considering your history of negative comments directed at me.

I did a little research on the PFBC's website about what constitutes a legal fly in a FFO area.

Per the PFBC's regulations for FFO areas: "Fishing may be done with artificial flies and streamers constructed of natural or synthetic materials, so long as all flies are constructed in a normal fashion with components wound on or about the hook."

I guess "natural or synthetic materials" covers just about every material, so putting rubber legs on a fly would be legal, as I thought it would be. To me though it just makes fly fishing even more like bait fishing since some bait anglers use rubber baits. I'm surprised fly fishermen would want to be more like bait fishermen, especially considering the negative view many fly fishermen have toward bait fishermen. I guess you have to go with what works though.

So I guess putting a rubber tail, body and head would be legal too, as long as it is "constructed in a normal fashion with components wound on or about the hook."

What I'd like to know though is how a beadhead fly is legal based on the PFBC's definition? The bead is certainly not "constructed in a normal fashion with components wound on or about the hook." Why not just make a "fly" with four or five beads? Then make it even better by adding a blade and a clevis.
Not sure where you get that from. You feeling a little butthurt or left out not sure.. I don't bash your ego inflating posts about how many 4" trout you catch means nothing to me.. But you are always trying to put down flyfishers seems like nothing but some kind of ego boost for you...Kinda sad really...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,827 Posts
treetipper said:
FrankTroutAngler said:
treetipper said:
One would expect that from you...
I've gotten similar responses from ego-bruised fly fishermen before, so another one from you doesn't surprise me considering your history of negative comments directed at me.

I did a little research on the PFBC's website about what constitutes a legal fly in a FFO area.

Per the PFBC's regulations for FFO areas: "Fishing may be done with artificial flies and streamers constructed of natural or synthetic materials, so long as all flies are constructed in a normal fashion with components wound on or about the hook."

I guess "natural or synthetic materials" covers just about every material, so putting rubber legs on a fly would be legal, as I thought it would be. To me though it just makes fly fishing even more like bait fishing since some bait anglers use rubber baits. I'm surprised fly fishermen would want to be more like bait fishermen, especially considering the negative view many fly fishermen have toward bait fishermen. I guess you have to go with what works though.

So I guess putting a rubber tail, body and head would be legal too, as long as it is "constructed in a normal fashion with components wound on or about the hook."

What I'd like to know though is how a beadhead fly is legal based on the PFBC's definition? The bead is certainly not "constructed in a normal fashion with components wound on or about the hook." Why not just make a "fly" with four or five beads? Then make it even better by adding a blade and a clevis.
Not sure where you get that from. You feeling a little butthurt or left out not sure.. I don't bash your ego inflating posts about how many 4" trout you catch means nothing to me.. But you are always trying to put down flyfishers seems like nothing but some kind of ego boost for you...Kinda sad really...
I am glad I am not the only one who noticed this. I think FTA is a frustrated want-to-be flyfisher. Only he knows for sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,246 Posts
WildTigerTrout said:
treetipper said:
FrankTroutAngler said:
treetipper said:
One would expect that from you...
I've gotten similar responses from ego-bruised fly fishermen before, so another one from you doesn't surprise me considering your history of negative comments directed at me.

I did a little research on the PFBC's website about what constitutes a legal fly in a FFO area.

Per the PFBC's regulations for FFO areas: "Fishing may be done with artificial flies and streamers constructed of natural or synthetic materials, so long as all flies are constructed in a normal fashion with components wound on or about the hook."

I guess "natural or synthetic materials" covers just about every material, so putting rubber legs on a fly would be legal, as I thought it would be. To me though it just makes fly fishing even more like bait fishing since some bait anglers use rubber baits. I'm surprised fly fishermen would want to be more like bait fishermen, especially considering the negative view many fly fishermen have toward bait fishermen. I guess you have to go with what works though.

So I guess putting a rubber tail, body and head would be legal too, as long as it is "constructed in a normal fashion with components wound on or about the hook."

What I'd like to know though is how a beadhead fly is legal based on the PFBC's definition? The bead is certainly not "constructed in a normal fashion with components wound on or about the hook." Why not just make a "fly" with four or five beads? Then make it even better by adding a blade and a clevis.
Not sure where you get that from. You feeling a little butthurt or left out not sure.. I don't bash your ego inflating posts about how many 4" trout you catch means nothing to me.. But you are always trying to put down flyfishers seems like nothing but some kind of ego boost for you...Kinda sad really...
I am glad I am not the only one who noticed this. I think FTA is a frustrated want-to-be flyfisher. Only he knows for sure.
I find it to be an interesting dynamic when someone has no answer to my question, so they use name-calling as a last resort.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top